The real question is why the President is once again appointing a lawyer ~ we already know what lawyers are like. Personally, I'd prefer someone who'd managed a large company to a profitable year.
How about hiring a successful accountant to do open heart surgery? Law requires lawyers because it is dense stuff, built-up over the 1,000+ years of the common law. Common sense is no help in legal matters, as most Anglo-American legal doctrines are counter-intuitive in nature. One does not have to be a judge to be in the Supremes, but a thorough legal education (evinced by a sound and well-articulated judicial philiosophy) is necessary.
Ridiculous. That is a specific spot in the Division of Labor which requires skills not translatable to the Supreme Court anymore than a Justice could run a company.
"Well he can hit a baseball so why don't we make him an offensive lineman." makes as much sense.